The Surge: From Worse to Worst?

by Jim Lobe

ARBIL - More than four months after the launch of the U.S. government's new
Iraq strategy aimed at curbing violence in this war-torn country, the situation
here shows no clear signs of improvement. Indeed, a recent report by a British
think-tank warns [.pdf] that Iraq is a "failure" on the verge
of "collapse and fragmentation."

While a surge in the number of U.S. troops and a new security plan to make
Baghdad safe were at the core of President George W. Bush's new strategy, there
has been no noteworthy progress to that end.

Although the death toll in the capital has considerably decreased, overall
casualties across the country have not dropped. Under siege in Baghdad, insurgents
have largely shifted their attacks to the neighboring provinces in order to
diffuse the increasing pressure on them in the capital.

According to figures by the Iraq Body
Count  a group that maintains a database of media-reported civilian
deaths attributable to military action and sectarian and criminal violence since
the 2003 U.S.-led invasion  in January, the month before the start of
the Baghdad security plan, 2,800 people were killed.

In February the monthly total dropped slightly to 2,720, while in the first
27 days of this month, 2,500 civilians have been killed, showing no major decline
in violence.

Citing the complexity of the situation in Iraq, the report by the prestigious
Chatham House think tank notes that "there is not one civil war nor one
insurgency, but several civil wars and insurgencies" going on simultaneously.

In the central parts of the country, Shia and Sunni Muslims are fighting each
other. In the mixed areas of the north a conflict, though still small, has broken
out between Arabs and Kurds. The western parts of the country are witnessing
Sunni tribes fighting the al-Qaeda terror network, and in the south Shia political
groups are fighting for power and control of oil-rich areas like Basra.

Added to this is a relentless insurgency by various groups against the Iraqi
government and foreign troops.

Bilal A. Wahab, a political researcher from Arbil, says that "compared
to now, what could be worse for Iraq is an all-out civil war" where everyone
would fight everyone.

He criticized the new Iraq strategy for mainly focusing on military actions
and putting little effort into the political and economic dimensions. The resulting
imbalance, he said, has further shaken people's faith in the current system.

"Under the present circumstances, what the sect, tribe or political party
can offer you [in Iraq], the government cannot, and these groups have become
alternative sources of income and protection," Wahab told IPS.

The number of people joining the armed and political groups in Iraq has increased
alarmingly, given the high rate of unemployment, estimated at around 60 percent.

"Different patronage networks are being built in the country, and they
will be the number-one destabilizer of a unified country in the future,"
Wahab said.

The high level of corruption in state institutions has further alienated the
Iraqi public from the government and has created a deep mistrust between the
politicians and the people.

Four years after the invasion, the Iraqi and U.S. governments have basically
failed to take any concrete steps to address the essential needs of the people
in terms of public services and getting the economy back on its feet.

In the absence of a powerful government capable of bringing law and order to
the most volatile parts of the country, Iraq has turned into different hemispheres
of influence for the neighboring states.

Mawlud Murad, a senior official of the Kurdistan Islamic Union, said the very
make-up of the government has to be changed in order to empower it to take serious
action.

"In my opinion, as long as the current government is in place and the
current security, military, and regional status quo remains unchanged, no positive
change can be expected in the situation in Iraq," said Murad, whose party
holds five seats in the Iraqi parliament.

While Iraq is ever deeper stuck in violence and uncertainty, there are increasing
calls and pressure in Washington for the U.S. to pull its troops out. But many
in Iraq fear that this would turn their country into a real bloodbath with irreversible
losses.

A withdrawal "would be very bad and would be an escape by the U.S. from
its historic responsibility towards Iraq, since much of the conflict in the
country has been created as a result of the U.S. presence," Murad said.

Jim
Lobe, works as Inter Press Service's
correspondent in the Washington, D.C., bureau. He has followed the
ups and downs of neo-conservatives since well before their rise in
the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Reproduction of material from any original Antiwar.com pages
without written permission is strictly prohibited.
Copyright 2003 Antiwar.com